Skip to main content
PMC home page
The EMBO Journal logoLink to The EMBO Journal
. 1998 May 1;17(9):2687–2698. doi: 10.1093/emboj/17.9.2687

RAD9 and RAD24 define two additive, interacting branches of the DNA damage checkpoint pathway in budding yeast normally required for Rad53 modification and activation.

M A de la Torre-Ruiz 1, C M Green 1, N F Lowndes 1
PMCID: PMC1170609  PMID: 9564050

Abstract

In budding yeast, RAD9 and RAD24/RAD17/MEC3 are believed to function upstream of MEC1 and RAD53 in signalling the presence of DNA damage. Deletion of any one of these genes reduces the normal G1/S and G2/M checkpoint delays after UV irradiation, whereas in rad9Delta-rad24Delta cells the G1/S checkpoint is undetectable, although there is a residual G2/M checkpoint. We have shown previously that RAD9 also controls the transcriptional induction of a DNA damage regulon (DDR). We now report that efficient DDR induction requires all the above-mentioned checkpoint genes. Residual induction of the DDR after UV irradiation observed in all single mutants is not detectable in rad9Delta-rad24Delta. We have examined the G2/M checkpoint and UV sensitivity of single mutants after overexpression of the checkpoint proteins. This analysis indicates that RAD9 and the RAD24 epistasis group can be placed onto two separate, additive branches that converge on MEC1 and RAD53. Furthermore, MEC3 appears to function downstream of RAD24/RAD17. The transcriptional response to DNA damage revealed unexpected and specific antagonism between RAD9 and RAD24. Further support for genetic interaction between RAD9 and RAD24 comes from study of the modification and activation of Rad53 after damage. Evidence for bypass of RAD53 function under some conditions is also presented.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (638.8 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Aboussekhra A., Vialard J. E., Morrison D. E., de la Torre-Ruiz M. A., Cernáková L., Fabre F., Lowndes N. F. A novel role for the budding yeast RAD9 checkpoint gene in DNA damage-dependent transcription. EMBO J. 1996 Aug 1;15(15):3912–3922. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Allen J. B., Zhou Z., Siede W., Friedberg E. C., Elledge S. J. The SAD1/RAD53 protein kinase controls multiple checkpoints and DNA damage-induced transcription in yeast. Genes Dev. 1994 Oct 15;8(20):2401–2415. doi: 10.1101/gad.8.20.2401. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. BURNS V. W. X-ray-induced division delay of individual yeast cells. Radiat Res. 1956 May;4(5):394–412. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Baudin A., Ozier-Kalogeropoulos O., Denouel A., Lacroute F., Cullin C. A simple and efficient method for direct gene deletion in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nucleic Acids Res. 1993 Jul 11;21(14):3329–3330. doi: 10.1093/nar/21.14.3329. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Brunborg G., Williamson D. H. The relevance of the nuclear division cycle to radiosensitivity in yeast. Mol Gen Genet. 1978 Jul 4;162(3):277–286. doi: 10.1007/BF00268853. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cohen-Fix O., Koshland D. The anaphase inhibitor of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Pds1p is a target of the DNA damage checkpoint pathway. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Dec 23;94(26):14361–14366. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.26.14361. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Eckardt-Schupp F., Siede W., Game J. C. The RAD24 (= Rs1) gene product of Saccharomyces cerevisiae participates in two different pathways of DNA repair. Genetics. 1987 Jan;115(1):83–90. doi: 10.1093/genetics/115.1.83. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Elledge S. J. Cell cycle checkpoints: preventing an identity crisis. Science. 1996 Dec 6;274(5293):1664–1672. doi: 10.1126/science.274.5293.1664. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fay D. S., Sun Z., Stern D. F. Mutations in SPK1/RAD53 that specifically abolish checkpoint but not growth-related functions. Curr Genet. 1997 Feb;31(2):97–105. doi: 10.1007/s002940050181. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Foreman P. K., Davis R. W. Cloning vectors for the synthesis of epitope-tagged, truncated and chimeric proteins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Gene. 1994 Jun 24;144(1):63–68. doi: 10.1016/0378-1119(94)90204-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Hartwell L. H., Kastan M. B. Cell cycle control and cancer. Science. 1994 Dec 16;266(5192):1821–1828. doi: 10.1126/science.7997877. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kim S., Weinert T. A. Characterization of the checkpoint gene RAD53/MEC2 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast. 1997 Jun 30;13(8):735–745. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0061(19970630)13:8<735::AID-YEA136>3.0.CO;2-V. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Kiser G. L., Weinert T. A. Distinct roles of yeast MEC and RAD checkpoint genes in transcriptional induction after DNA damage and implications for function. Mol Biol Cell. 1996 May;7(5):703–718. doi: 10.1091/mbc.7.5.703. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Longhese M. P., Fraschini R., Plevani P., Lucchini G. Yeast pip3/mec3 mutants fail to delay entry into S phase and to slow DNA replication in response to DNA damage, and they define a functional link between Mec3 and DNA primase. Mol Cell Biol. 1996 Jul;16(7):3235–3244. doi: 10.1128/mcb.16.7.3235. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Longhese M. P., Paciotti V., Fraschini R., Zaccarini R., Plevani P., Lucchini G. The novel DNA damage checkpoint protein ddc1p is phosphorylated periodically during the cell cycle and in response to DNA damage in budding yeast. EMBO J. 1997 Sep 1;16(17):5216–5226. doi: 10.1093/emboj/16.17.5216. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Lydall D., Weinert T. Yeast checkpoint genes in DNA damage processing: implications for repair and arrest. Science. 1995 Dec 1;270(5241):1488–1491. doi: 10.1126/science.270.5241.1488. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Morgan S. E., Kastan M. B. p53 and ATM: cell cycle, cell death, and cancer. Adv Cancer Res. 1997;71:1–25. doi: 10.1016/s0065-230x(08)60095-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Murnane J. P. Cell cycle regulation in response to DNA damage in mammalian cells: a historical perspective. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 1995 Mar;14(1):17–29. doi: 10.1007/BF00690208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Navas T. A., Sanchez Y., Elledge S. J. RAD9 and DNA polymerase epsilon form parallel sensory branches for transducing the DNA damage checkpoint signal in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genes Dev. 1996 Oct 15;10(20):2632–2643. doi: 10.1101/gad.10.20.2632. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Pati D., Keller C., Groudine M., Plon S. E. Reconstitution of a MEC1-independent checkpoint in yeast by expression of a novel human fork head cDNA. Mol Cell Biol. 1997 Jun;17(6):3037–3046. doi: 10.1128/mcb.17.6.3037. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Paulovich A. G., Margulies R. U., Garvik B. M., Hartwell L. H. RAD9, RAD17, and RAD24 are required for S phase regulation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae in response to DNA damage. Genetics. 1997 Jan;145(1):45–62. doi: 10.1093/genetics/145.1.45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Sanchez Y., Desany B. A., Jones W. J., Liu Q., Wang B., Elledge S. J. Regulation of RAD53 by the ATM-like kinases MEC1 and TEL1 in yeast cell cycle checkpoint pathways. Science. 1996 Jan 19;271(5247):357–360. doi: 10.1126/science.271.5247.357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Shinagawa H. SOS response as an adaptive response to DNA damage in prokaryotes. EXS. 1996;77:221–235. doi: 10.1007/978-3-0348-9088-5_14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Siede W., Friedberg A. S., Dianova I., Friedberg E. C. Characterization of G1 checkpoint control in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae following exposure to DNA-damaging agents. Genetics. 1994 Oct;138(2):271–281. doi: 10.1093/genetics/138.2.271. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Siede W., Friedberg A. S., Friedberg E. C. RAD9-dependent G1 arrest defines a second checkpoint for damaged DNA in the cell cycle of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993 Sep 1;90(17):7985–7989. doi: 10.1073/pnas.90.17.7985. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Siede W., Friedberg E. C. Influence of DNA repair deficiencies on the UV sensitivity of yeast cells in different cell cycle stages. Mutat Res. 1990 Dec;245(4):287–292. doi: 10.1016/0165-7992(90)90158-g. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Sun Z., Fay D. S., Marini F., Foiani M., Stern D. F. Spk1/Rad53 is regulated by Mec1-dependent protein phosphorylation in DNA replication and damage checkpoint pathways. Genes Dev. 1996 Feb 15;10(4):395–406. doi: 10.1101/gad.10.4.395. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Walker G. C. Mutagenesis and inducible responses to deoxyribonucleic acid damage in Escherichia coli. Microbiol Rev. 1984 Mar;48(1):60–93. doi: 10.1128/mr.48.1.60-93.1984. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Weinert T. A., Hartwell L. H. The RAD9 gene controls the cell cycle response to DNA damage in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Science. 1988 Jul 15;241(4863):317–322. doi: 10.1126/science.3291120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Weinert T. A., Kiser G. L., Hartwell L. H. Mitotic checkpoint genes in budding yeast and the dependence of mitosis on DNA replication and repair. Genes Dev. 1994 Mar 15;8(6):652–665. doi: 10.1101/gad.8.6.652. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Yang S. S., Yeh E., Salmon E. D., Bloom K. Identification of a mid-anaphase checkpoint in budding yeast. J Cell Biol. 1997 Jan 27;136(2):345–354. doi: 10.1083/jcb.136.2.345. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Zhou Z., Elledge S. J. DUN1 encodes a protein kinase that controls the DNA damage response in yeast. Cell. 1993 Dec 17;75(6):1119–1127. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(93)90321-g. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The EMBO Journal are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES